In case you haven’t read it yet, check out this outrage over at the Asia Pages. Jodi had every right to be pissed. Disgusting.
-
English Books on Korea... and More!
-
Visit My Brother's Film Review Site
Ain’t white enough?
This entry was written by Robert Koehler, posted on March 7, 2005 at 4:29 am, filed under Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink. Follow any comments here with the RSS feed for this post.
Trackbacks are closed, but you can post a comment.
34 Comments
While we’re on the topic of disgusting, try this one out for size.
In my last job, I was a benefactor of the exact outrageous attitude described by Jodi in her rant. The CEO of the Korean company I work for hired me in spite of my lack of Korean language skills and in most part because I was “tall and handsome.” He told me these things in my interview, and I had no problem accepting his offer.
So now you’re outraged. Until you hear why he was forced into considering hiring an attractive caucasian in the first place.
My job was similar to the situation Jodi described, with the role of liaison to European and American customers both while in Korea and abroad when we traveled to western countries.
Of the two previous PR types that held my position, the first was an ethnic Korean. He lasted 4 months. My boss was 68 years old, and therefore only took part in the daytime, office-based meetings. He expected the PR man and younger staff to entertain foreign customers with dinners which he generally didn’t attend.
According to him, on 3 separate occasions, foreign clients complained directly to him that the Korean PR man took them to “inappropriate” places. In other words, room salons. Despite the foreign customers protestations to the contrary, the ethnic Korean dragged them to their favorite drinking/whoring establishments, and proceeded to play the “this is Korean culture, you have to drink this whiskey and fondle this 18-year old” card.
The second hire was a Korean-Canadian, who was under explicit instructions to stay the hell away from room salons. He complied.
Unfortunately, what he couldn’t resist doing, was bagging on his own company and its ethnic Korean employees as backwards. His PR work consisted of trashing Korea as a third-world hellhole and Korean business culture as a joke, with the added bonus of a healthy dose of anti-Americanism, which he felt necessary to vomit upon American customers. He spent more time talking about the evils of Bush than he did his own company business.
He lasted 6 months.
I was there 4.5 years, and left the company only because of a family emergency back in the states. The CEO liked me because i had no agenda when I met with foreign customers. I didn’t talk politics, didn’t try to push any “culture” on them, and I had absolutely no problem understanding what they were comfortable with and what they weren’t.
I have no idea what kind of experiences Jodi’s pal had with ethnic Koreans or gyopos. But I will say that before you go labeling his attitude “disgusting” or an outrage, you may want to dig deeper, because sometimes disgusting is completely rational and a product of experience.
i work for a major korean company. they hired me specifically because i am foreign and the position deals with foreigners. my korean colleagues that were doing this job all had experience living abroad, but still couldn’t quite grasp the intricate difficulties that a foreigner might have living in korea - thus they hired me.
the major consulting unit of the company is primarily staffed with non-koreans from all over the world. the reason is not because they can do better than koreans but rather to put a more international face on the company.
What’s wrong with some diversity? Probably most of us here do things that only a foreigner can do well — otherwise we wouldn’t be here. Who’s to say an American company doing business with many Korean customers shouldn’t hire a Korean to do that kind of work? It’s a free market and I for one find the relative lack of political correctness in this country quite refreshing.
There is nothing wrong with diversity. There is something wrong, however, with saying “We will only hire a white guy for this position.”
whiteyinkorea — interesting story, but let me ask you this. If I were to have, let’s say, a bad experience (or even 2!) with a black employee in a particular position, and then decided that I would no longer hire black people for that position, would my decision still be completely rational? If a hagwon or university English department were to make a decision to hire only Korean-Americans because one of their white American teachers got caught sleeping with the students, would it still be still be completely rational?
1. Presumably, Jodi would not mind if an ethnic Korean represented a U.S. firm as its “public face” when dealing with Korean counterparts. Or would she be as equally outraged?
2. Is it not Jodi who is racist? Why should she (or anyone else) be disturbed enough to blurt, “If I come to Korea to deal with a Korean corporation, especially a well-known one, I want to work with the Koreans.” When one thinks about the fact that such well-known Korean companies as POSCO and Samsung actually have a majority of shares in the hands of non-Koreans, or depends upon overseas operations as a major component of corporate income, what becomes of that emotional argument?
4. It is obvious that although the CEO with the objectionable hiring policy is Korean, Jodi reserves her most heated vituperation for whites who dare to work in Korea. With this sort of axe to grind, it might be understandable that the CEO would want someone a bit more neutral/objective (vid. whiteyinkorea’s comments).
5. Despite what Jodi writes about that one nameless company, the fact is that it is also far more likely that the non-Korean managers of Korea branches of foreign companies (such as investment banks) have a preference to hire kyopos over more highly-qualified non-Koreans, under the mistaken belief because of their ethnicity, kyopos have an innate and intrinsic knowledge of the Korean language and Korean business customs, especially vis-a-vis non-Koreans. This, however, is not necessarily true. I personally have witnessed many instances where a kyopo has made a serious faux pas due to his improper use of Korean or failure to observe social norms that becomes an unintentional insult.
I am a Korean living in US and I was hired by US firm to do PR work for Korean clients. I think it is more of a business decision than anything else. I seriously doubt that the company wants to hire caucasians because they are more “attractive” since I haven’t found that many here.
Marmot wrote, “If I were to have, let??s say, a bad experience (or even 2!) with a black employee in a particular position, and then decided that I would no longer hire black people for that position, would my decision still be completely rational?”
That depends - how many bad experiences can you have before you go out of business, or figure out the real source of the problem(s)?
Marmot, you are way off on this one.
The executive made a decision based on common sense. I think ‘jodi’ has exaggerated the idea that it is entirely about outward appearance, rather than the qualities that european staff can bring to western customers. I am not sure how carefully you read the text but jodi comes across as having a lot of anger towards white people. Would he be a suitable person to liase with western customers?
Furthermore, this Jodi goes on to make a racial appeal for ethnic nepotism in hiring employees. I find it amazing that you do not find this incredibly hypocritical, marmot.
This company has obviously changed its old policy to the new one that Jodi objects to. Could it be because the old policy was an utter failure? The business of business is to make money, not to fulfill a politically correct agenda.
‘isn’t she the racist?’ dogbert
‘a kyopo…’ dogbert
how about korean american?
Is “kyopo” now a racist term? I missed the last issue of “PC Alert!”
Dear Marmot,
I would have guessed your outrage and disgust. A white-boy wearing Hanbok is the tip-off.
Jodi’s premise is that Korean employers offering valued jobs are not free to hire white-skinned westerners. When whites are hired for these jobs — there is implied a lack of appreciation for the Korean race.
This lack of appreciation is subject to the wrath of Judge Jodi.
Within Judge Jodi’s logic it follows that the “cause” of the feeling of unappreciation for Koreans — is the very existence of white people. The idea that white oppressors have stolen appreciation from racial Koreans.
Jodi is essentially bringing Whitey to account for daring to come to Korea and obtain a valued job — that should be given to a Korean.
The Marmot curiously seems to be self-imagining himself as a Civil Rights worker — marching down to Selma Alabama alongside with his Korean sister.
Yet, the inherent inequity lies in Jodi’s back-door racism hiding behind her apparent demands for racial justice.
The logic of this principle requires that the Korean race is entitled to be loved “more” — in order to compensate Koreans, while the white oppressors deserve to be humiliated for their effrontery at having taken appreciation taken away from racial Koreans.
Taken together, what Marmot’s co-enabling means is that those who feel unappreciated will be confirmed in their resentments and will be helped to take back the appreciation which has been stolen from them. Then they will feel appreciated and life will be perfect.
This is the ideology that defines politically-correct faggotry.
I suspect the Marmot aligns himself with Politically Correct faggotry as a means of cleansing himself of his ancestor’s racist sins — emerging pure and undefiled above his racist white-brothers.
I suspect the Marmot is quite proud of his U2 Bono-styled activism.
Marmot — you are a legend in your own mind.
Marmot: If I were to have, let??s say, a bad experience (or even 2!) with a black employee in a particular position, and then decided that I would no longer hire black people for that position, would my decision still be completely rational?
Your analogy does not fit the situation I described. In fact my former boss never said that he would not hire an ethnic Korean or gyopo again. He simply decided that having failed previously with Koreans and gyopos, that he would try whitey to see how it worked out. It worked out not because I’m white, but because I was sensitive to the needs, likes, and dislikes of the people we were dealing with. When my boss hired my replacement, that was the first characteristic he looked for. He concluded — not solely through those 2 experiences, but through literally thousands of interactions between his staff (of hundreds of ethnic Koreans) and westerners, as well as observing interactions between Koreans from other companies and westerners at 7-8 trade shows and conventions we attended yearly — that he was more likely to find what he was looking for in a western candidate.
Perhaps you mistook my giving 2 examples for those being the only 2 examples that ever existed. Not true. They were the only 2 people he told me directly about, but he had similar problems for the last 10 years that he’s been dealing with western customers. Back then, he just figured he had no alternative because there were very few westerners working for mid-size Korean companies in that capacity and gyopos were considered too expensive and as unavailable and “outsiderish” as westerners. Now there are plenty of whitey available, and he’s able to compare the situation now to a history of frustration, miscommunication, and cultural gaps that hurt his business and its growth.
For that reason, your example of 1 or 2 bad experiences with a black teacher or 1 bad experience with an American teacher are ridiculous, and we both know it.
Even so, let me ask you this. If you owned a 7-11 and every day for 10 straight days, you caught a boy shoplifting who had a red hat on, would you not cast a suspicious eye at a boy wearing a red hat that walked in on that 11th day?
Were you to follow that red-hatted little boy around the store on the 11th day, would you brand yourself a racist? Or would that be hattist?
Hey dogbert, make sure you don’t say “ramen” either you bigot, it’s “instant noodles” for God’s sake. Don’t dare use Korean versions of words which are more applicable than, “Korean-Americam.”
To noolji maripkan - since this comment section wont take hangul, I have left a message for you on this link. Anyone is allowed to look though.
http://www.picvault.info/images/54295_nulji2.jpg
Shakuhachi, that’s hilarious!
On the word “attractive.” I’ve heard the word a few times and in this context I think the guy meant his foreign customers would be more comfortable with another foreigner, i.e. attracted. I don’t think the guy meant better looking.
Marmot: I’m with you 90% of the time, but in this case I think this Jodi is too PC. Her outburst doesn’t speak well of her ability to get along in this culture (she reminds me of a female who bragged about smoking on the street).
Whitey: Good points that would get you lynched at Harvard!
I’m wouldn’t go as far as to say she’s too PC. I would agree that telling off a high-ranking corporate exec was probably not the best way to register her displeasure with the man. That doesn’t take away from the fact that he was willing to waive hiring standards for white folk that he was willing to apply to Koreans. Diversity is fine, but reserving some jobs for locals and others for whitey isn’t the way to go. And I can understand how she’d be pissed off at being told something like that. I know if I were told by an exec that he would hire only overseas Koreans for a position, either because overseas Koreans have some sort of magical inate understanding of Korea or because Koreans would feel better working with someone who looks like them, I’d be somewhat dismayed. As the Oranckay pointed out in her comment section, having the “White Face” at the company is pretty demeaning to everyone involved.
Now, did Jodi make what might be construed as unfortunate statements? Yes. I think what seemed to be her call for Korean companies to hire only overseas Koreans kind of defeats the outrage expressed at the CEO’s intended hiring standards. As for her statement about whitey having “his place” his Korea, well, I’ll give her the benifit of the doubt and assume she didn’t mean that white folk should be restricted to certain professions. However, I’ve been reading her blog for quite some time now, and she makes quite a few good observations, and some of the accusations of racism or that she’s “angy at white folk” are, in my opinion, unfair. She had a bad experience and ranted. I’ve never read her say anything remotely racist before, and given that her parents are white and she’s from Minnesota, I’m willing to cut her some slack.
whiteyinkorea — I’m still having difficulty buying this argument. Sounds a lot like some of the excuses I’ve read from Korean shopkeepers in the US as to why they harrass black shoppers in their stores. The explanation as to why you were hired, however, seems relatively reasonable.
Kang — please find another forum to troll.
Marmot, you said: “…let??s say, a bad experience (or even 2!) with a black employee in a particular position, and then decided that I would no longer hire black people for that position, would my decision still be completely rational?” This is an odd question. Your decision would be rational if it accomplished your objective.
“If a hagwon or university English department were to make a decision to hire only Korean-Americans because one of their white American teachers got caught sleeping with the students, would it still be still be completely rational?”
Again, free enterprise, free market (in theory)…a private firm has the right to hire whomever they feel is the ‘best fit’. As an example, at a Korean graduate school that Marmot has some experience with, I was told that I coudn’t attend faculty meetings as others were not “comfortable” with me there - I was the only non-Korean faculty member at the time…I left soon after.
That is how it is in Korea, and many Koreans use this sort of unmitigated prejudice to their advantage, and become very upset when they percieve it working against them. As I posted on Jodi’s site, a Korean-Canadian told me very matter of factly that the ‘West’ is for all, but Korea is a playground exclusively for Koreans. It’s not an uncommon belief and Jodi seems to be a good example of this sort of thinking.
Quote David: ‘As I posted on Jodi??s site, a Korean-Canadian told me very matter of factly that the ??West?? is for all, but Korea is a playground exclusively for Koreans. It??s not an uncommon belief and Jodi seems to be a good example of this sort of thinking.’
David, you hit the nail right on the head. Koreans have often expressed the same sentiment to me, and I have felt offended by the double standard and the idea that somehow western countries are not ‘real’ countries with something worth preserving.
Marmot -
I’m curious as to why you’ve labelled “Kang” a troll? He’s on topic and does not appear to be race-baiting beyond the context of the post. In fact, much of what he wrote seems reasonable - if provocative.
After being in international business a while I’ve come to a few conclusions. One is that people who can effectively liaise between cultures are valuable. Someone who can massage a very blunt Korean message and yet keep the meaning before passing it on to a foreign business associate provides a very real and valuable service. Someone who can likewise smooth out what an American engineer, who questions the education of a Korean engineer, writes also comes in handy. People who can handle this both ways can make international business go much more smoothly. And BTW, this person doesn’t have to be fluent in both languages to be effective.
Does this liaison person have to be a white guy? No, not necessarily. However, in Korea oftentimes things get simplified and the executive takes the easy way out (e.g. rather than finding the best candidate out of a big pool he may focus on one race, thereby saving time and energy in his mind). Certainly that’s wrong but I happen to believe that a businessman has a right to hire people in any way he chooses. And making a big deal out of it in a restaurant certainly shows you don’t have the liaison talent.
Dave — Read his posts over at Jodi’s site.
One of the big things overlooked here according to Jodi’s account is “The exec told me that his CEO is now going to try and hire more Caucasians…” Just because he wants to hire “more” Caucasians does not mean Caucasians will be the only ones hired for a particular job. Simply he has had a positive experience with them thus far and wants to expand hiring Caucasians. Is that so bad?
I also think she took the word “attractive” out of context. It seems she took it as a beauty context but I would take it in more of an appealing context. “The business market is attractive now” does not mean the business market is Sexy or Hot.
I’ve never read her blog before so maybe this is her at her worst. This particular article was so hypocritical and racist it made me gage. I take it she is an adopted Korean and maybe she was trying to feel her Korean oats with this rant.
The thing she said about Koreans putting on white cream to look more western has been going on for thousands of years and has nothing to do with western culture. The Chinese (and thus Koreans) have valued white skin for thousands of years and have done things to whiten their skin for thousands of years.
I think there’s too much overblown hype on this issue, which is based on a bit of speculation on what exactly were the intentions of the recruiter and his boss anyway. Personally, I don’t give a rat’s ass about issues like that (not that I’m putting down that blog post — it stands fine as a personal rant note)
I understand my comment is off-topic, but IMO if there’s anything people should be truly outraged about in regard to racial discrimination in the Korean workforce, it’s the mistreatment being done to the foreign laborers in the so-called “3-d” jobs. And in that respect, the recent “????? ????? ?????” documentary (which I downloaded and watched), despite all its biases against the English teachers, still hit the nail square on the head.
clarification: this was a friendly dinner appointment, non-related to work, we were talking on a “peer basis” and not an exec vs. non exec level. so my “outrage” was like any sort of “outrage” i’d get engaged in when talking to one of my girlfriends about the rising price of shoes or something. i was not getting lippy to some sort of authority. please, give me some credit here. i’ve got more brains than that.
what bothered me was the fact that the idea that whites were being hired because they were “more attractive” blew a fuse in me and i’m sure it would blow a fuse in any of you as well if we replaced the word “white” with some other race. (btw, is it bad to use the word “white”? if so, i apologize.) anyway, the thing that bugged me is that this was a decision based on looks from what i was told, not on qualifications.
anyway apologies for any “possible racist” remarks that came out as that was not the intention.
are you sure that by “more attractive” to the people overseas dealing with this company that it was not an aesthetic thing but a comfort thing?
i’m not saying that would justify it (it would not), but from what you said, i didn’t get the sense that whites are oh-so-good-looking and that’s why he wanted to hire them; i have heard similar things from various companies from hagwons to samsung and they have a sense that clientele will be more ‘comfortable’ with certain types and thus they are more attractive as hires.
the big problem, and this is where it is different from affirmative action in the u.s., is that such companies all too often apply an all-or-nothing approach: only whites for this job, only koreans for this job, without looking to see if a kyopo, a korean, a white, a black, or whoever might be the most appropriate person for such-and-such job, whatever the criteria may be.
well the word “beautiful” did come up in the conversation. and why else would other qualifications be waived if this wasn’t a looks only issue? i’ve been tempted to actually name the company to further illustrate my anger but i’m not going to do that. anyway, as i said later on on the comment section of my blog, they can do whatever they want, i don’t care. i’m willing to roll with change if that is what was needed. let’s not forget, it was only a rant. perhpaps from now on i should do what The Asia Pages readers have feared and start self-censoring my posts as this topic completely touched too many nerves. perhaps i should lie low and let BJ take over as he seems to be doing a good job over there…
oh, i agree it’s a looks-related issue. but that doesn’t mean that ‘attractive’ means physically attractive. having a white person as the face of the company in predominantly white countries is also a looks-related issue that is a different kind of attractiveness (comfort).
but i wasn’t there, so i don’t know the tone of the discussion. i’m only basing this on the quote you gave.
if it were me and i didn’t have care about burning bridges with them, i would name names. for no other reason than the fact that companies that don’t have such a policy might be smeared by this.
if this is a policy they have, then they should stand by it. they don’t need your help keeping it a secret.
but that’s just me.
Well — Sony just hired a Welshman (did I get that write? Definitely caucasian) to head its company. First non-Japanese ever to head Sony.
I think you and many others are vanely over-reacting and being a bit self-indulgent.
I’m emberassed for you at how you acted during the meeting. The guy’s logic is not all that off track and I can see why a company might want to hire a few white faces to add to the mix and give investors a confident feeling that the company is branching out world-wide and attempting to maximize communication. Koreans don’t think the same as us, and they know this. Having a white side-kick might smooth out some of the wrinkles. As well, a lot of foreign business people loath dealing with Koreans on their own. Who can blame anyone by being comforted that the company is aware of this? I think you and many have misunderstood the issue, and maybe his english skills failed him and he didn’t convey it properly. Looks DO count in this world. First impressions are important. Remember when you were young and you had ugly teachers and pretty ones? The bias works both ways as well. Companies use foreign faces in advertisements to make people think they are international. Why not?
Throw your jaded idealism out the window and face reality for just a second. Of course it would be nice if you they also valued your skills and intelligence, but sometimes that is not the most important thing.
“I??m emberassed for you at how you acted during the meeting.” i think i’m just going to give up tyring to get people to read here, but it wasn’t a meeting. i was having dinner with a friend and last i heard, friends were free to passionately express their opinions in front of each other. i guess i should have made it more clear–it was a non work related dinner and the exec was a friend and we got into a friendly debate which got me riled but didn’t at all deal with business.
i guess this is the danger with blogging. people read selectively. they read only what they want to read. if they want to read that this was a business meeting where i acted wrongly, then that is what they will read regardless of the facts, even if they were stated in the blog.
by the way, sony’s hiring of a welshman had nothing to do with looks. he was hired to come in and do what nissan’s foreign CEO did: take over a failing japanese company and save it from going into the red or to use his expertise to keep it a competitive company. yesterday’s financial times said sony’s hiring of this man just goes to show how bad a state sony is in and the FT did not view the hiring as a good sign for the company. actually, that came out wrong. his hiring shows how badly the company has fallen under japanese management. the fact is, foreigners are starting to get respect in japan not because of how they look but for their skills and experience which to me, is the way it should be.
Jodi keeps talking about “unqualified foreigners” but what is interesting is the qualifications are usually bogus. Why is fluency in Korean necessary to talk to foreigners. Perhaps she is suggestion that the CEO will hire burger flippers without a MBA? i dont know, but I think she is trying to get out of her racist comments by claiming that she was only upset that the CEO was hiring “unqualified” foreingers.
I wonder what her qualifications were? I bet that three were more qualified Korean -non Kyopo out there.. but her CEO figured that other factors outweighed her shortcomings. I doubt she can see that point through her hatred. Its a shame.
Let me support Jodi in a few points:
1) a company should hire someone only on his profesional
skills: this is the best strategy for it and a fair social
behaviour (remember citizenship?).
2) As a white in Korea, I have been told enumerable times I
am “beautiful”, whilst I am not, and out of any context
(even by a monk in a monatery).
This means something, you cannot ignore this.
3) As for fascination for the West, it is not because Korean
and Chinese have had a preference for white skins since
antique times that it refutes their attraction to the Western
beauty standards nowadays. Both are true statements, in
my mind.
Many of the commenters prone a “company does what it wants, period” motto. As a Frenchman, politically on the left (not the left as in the USA, I mean real left), I found that conception of life in society unfair. Companies belong to the society, not the contrary. There are laws, and laws are also made for defending the weakest (otherwise, why bother). I think there is a cultural biais here, I just wanted to make it obvious. No offend intended.
[Please don't come at me with French bashing of any kind because my family is almost entirely Spanish and I have fresh German roots. I don't care of flags of any kind.]